What's Risky?

“Will my Money Market fund be there tomorrow?”

“Is my savings account safe?”

As this financial crisis progresses, we’re hearing phrases like these whispered more and more.

What we once thought were risk-free investment vehicles now carry disproportionate risk, leaving people to consider making a run on their banks.

What times are these?!

However, in the early stage investing world, relative to the rest of the financial markets, times aren’t changing very much at all.

As recently as two weeks ago (post-Lehman), the New York Angels — a relatively conservative Angel group, considering its proximity to Wall Street — polled its members and found that the amount of investors looking to invest less, the same, or more in the coming year was a healthy bell curve.

Readers of popular VC and Angel blogs, like AVC and Information Arbitrage will also find a relatively optimistic tune being sung; and my own boss, David S. Rose, falls in line with those NY Angels who will likely invest the same, if not more, in the coming year.

“Excellent start-up prospects will continue to get funded and grow, even in today’s hostile environment,” reports Roger Ehrenberg.

Fred Wilson also added today,

I don’t think we are in a “depression” in startup land. We are in a down cycle driven by a bad global economy. I think the web and information technology is one of the few bright spots in an overall gloomy economic outlook…

The tools and services that are made in the web technology business are only going to increase in demand over the next five years.

Of course, wise investors, such as Fred and Roger and David, while optimistic, aren’t stupidly so — and they do pepper their optimism with a more cautious tone now than a few months ago.

But, what’s absolutely remarkable here, is that the early stage investing market — at both ends of its spectrum (VC and Angel) — have become only slightly more risky when compared with more traditional investment markets. That is: the relative risk of the early stage game is disproportionately lower than other investments, given that when the market returns from this slump, new companies started should be poised to bring greater gains to their investors.

All this then begs the question: What’s risky?

Is it less risky to put your money in startups vs in a savings account? On balance, no, but ask that to a Washington Mutual customer and they may hesitate a little before asking.

Are you better off extending a line of credit to an existing company than taking equity in a zero-revenue prototype? Again, on balance, probably not — but for more and more financiers, the early stage investment will be more on par with their appetite for risk and reward.

Mash up the shifting landscape of risk and reward with the opening of the early stage investment game (look at the path Angelsoft is on) and the continuing lowering of early stage barriers, and one of the most significant results of the market could be a tetonic shift of what “risk” looks like in the early stage investment game.

This entry was posted in Economy, Entrepreneurship. Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://thedreaminaction.com/ ryangraves

    Nate – Awesome post. I've been thinking/blogging about the effects of the crisis on startups a lot recently and the risk profile was my next topic. I may use a bit of this post in mine, giving cred of course!
    Here is a summary post I wrote…let me know what you think.
    http://ryanagraves.com/09/30/2008/summary-finan…
    Cheers.

  • http://thedreaminaction.com/ Ryan Graves

    Nate – Awesome post. I've been thinking/blogging about the effects of the crisis on startups a lot recently and the risk profile was my next topic. I may use a bit of this post in mine, giving cred of course!
    Here is a summary post I wrote…let me know what you think.
    http://ryanagraves.com/09/30/2008/summary-finan…
    Cheers.

  • http://logantwedt.com Logan Twedt

    If you make a quality product that has utility and just enough “cool” behind it, you'll be profitable. Economic recessions and marketing can throw the numbers one way or another, but if you make something people want, they'll still want it regardless of what their being told by Wall St., advertisements or anything else.

  • http://logantwedt.com Logan Twedt

    If you make a quality product that has utility and just enough “cool” behind it, you'll be profitable. Economic recessions and marketing can throw the numbers one way or another, but if you make something people want, they'll still want it regardless of what their being told by Wall St., advertisements or anything else.

  • http://avc.com fredwilson

    Nate:

    I think an early stage investment is still way more risky than a money market fund or a bank deposit. it's just the expecations have changed. you can in fact lose a bit, maybe not much of your cash in a money market fund. until now, we thought that was impossible. so the expectations have changed.

    on an early stage investment, you need to be prepared to lose your money at least a third of the time, and probably more like half the time. and that is your entire investment, not just a little bit.

    so i don't think you can compare the two.

    i do think angel and seed investing in the next 12 months will be down, maybe a lot.

    fred

  • http://avc.com fredwilson

    Nate:

    I think an early stage investment is still way more risky than a money market fund or a bank deposit. it's just the expecations have changed. you can in fact lose a bit, maybe not much of your cash in a money market fund. until now, we thought that was impossible. so the expectations have changed.

    on an early stage investment, you need to be prepared to lose your money at least a third of the time, and probably more like half the time. and that is your entire investment, not just a little bit.

    so i don't think you can compare the two.

    i do think angel and seed investing in the next 12 months will be down, maybe a lot.

    fred

  • http://innonate.com/ innonate

    To clarify, I'm certainly not saying early stage investing is less risky than a MMF or bank deposit… I'm just saying that while their relative risk has drastically increased recently, early stage risk has increased only incrementally, causing a reexamination of relative risk/reward for the investments.

    I, of course, still see early stage investing as risky.

    As for seed investing over the next 12 months, you definitely have a more educated perspective here, but because seed money goes out the door rather slowly anyhow, my guess is that if seed investing is down, it will be down a little compared with other investments.

    We'll see!

  • http://innonate.com/ innonate

    To clarify, I'm certainly not saying early stage investing is less risky than a MMF or bank deposit… I'm just saying that while their relative risk has drastically increased recently, early stage risk has increased only incrementally, causing a reexamination of relative risk/reward for the investments.

    I, of course, still see early stage investing as risky.

    As for seed investing over the next 12 months, you definitely have a more educated perspective here, but because seed money goes out the door rather slowly anyhow, my guess is that if seed investing is down, it will be down a little compared with other investments.

    We'll see!

  • http://www.evbart.com evbart

    Last week I heard some west coast VC's say that they weren't too worried about the crisis and its effect on their funds, because institutional money needs to go somewhere and many of the other options are starting to look a lot less interesting.

    For you finance guys, how realistic is this?

    I understand people are still only going to alot a certain percentage (of a shrinking portfolio) to the venture side, but with less places to put your money, will this mean that people will still be able to raise funds? Or does the fact that there are going to be significantly fewer exits win out?

  • http://www.evbart.com evbart

    Last week I heard some west coast VC's say that they weren't too worried about the crisis and its effect on their funds, because institutional money needs to go somewhere and many of the other options are starting to look a lot less interesting.

    For you finance guys, how realistic is this?

    I understand people are still only going to alot a certain percentage (of a shrinking portfolio) to the venture side, but with less places to put your money, will this mean that people will still be able to raise funds? Or does the fact that there are going to be significantly fewer exits win out?

  • http://greenskeptic.blogspot.com greenskeptic

    Risk is relative. I'm personally taking a huge risk having left a stable job at Ashoka to explore my idea for a green energy investing platform…and I know my wife and others think I'm crazy for doing so at this time. That sentiment has only heightened over the past few weeks!

    I can think of no worse or better time to be doing what I'm doing.

    On the one hand, the current climate is going to make fundraising harder. Okay, so I'll have to make a really lean machine even leaner and swim in a narrower pool of prospects for risk/seed capital.

    On the other hand, the market is going to reorganize a whole bunch of sectors, including green energy financing, and perhaps the niche that I'm mining will benefit from such reorganization — in fact, that's what my idea is trying to make happen!

    Thanks for contributing to the dialogue.

  • http://thegreenskeptic.com/ greenskeptic

    Risk is relative. I'm personally taking a huge risk having left a stable job at Ashoka to explore my idea for a green energy investing platform…and I know my wife and others think I'm crazy for doing so at this time. That sentiment has only heightened over the past few weeks!

    I can think of no worse or better time to be doing what I'm doing.

    On the one hand, the current climate is going to make fundraising harder. Okay, so I'll have to make a really lean machine even leaner and swim in a narrower pool of prospects for risk/seed capital.

    On the other hand, the market is going to reorganize a whole bunch of sectors, including green energy financing, and perhaps the niche that I'm mining will benefit from such reorganization — in fact, that's what my idea is trying to make happen!

    Thanks for contributing to the dialogue.

  • Bronson

    Nate,
    Great post but I would add a caveat to what you are saying. Money is still going into and will continue to go into GOOD startups…. However, I think it would be easy for an entrepreneur to read your post, and think it isn’t going to be notably more difficult to raise money in the coming year(s?). It absolutely will. There are several reasons for this that all lead to less supply of money for startups.
    1) There are very few exits in this market. This means venture firms have to reserve more of there capital for follow on investment to get portfolio companies to break even. This means less of their capital going into new companies, especially at the early stages. (the most recent MoneyTree report documents that this is in fact happening)
    2) The majority of VC capital (not angel) comes from endowments and such. Endowments use portfolio theory to designate an optimum percentage of investment in ‘alternative assets’ (VC, PE, real estate…). When public markets decline, the percentage of their entire portfolio represented by alternative assets increases. They are forced to slow down or stop putting money into the over-weighted alternative assets until their portfolio is balanced again. This means less capital going into VC funds.

    Hence, there is less capital going in on the fund level over all and it has to take companies longer and farther. VCs shift their focus later to adjust, and spread out there existing capital over a longer time. Angels in turn must do the same to support their portfolio companies until they get venture funding. The pace of innovation isn’t slowing down (I don’t think) which means there is less capital to compete for good deals. Fewer deals will likely get done (with more reserve capital), supply and demand leads to lower valuations.

    I believe that in the free response you referred to the Angels were largely anticipating these lower valuations (akin to the last down turn). In short startups should anticipate getting lower valuations and more draconian terms than they may have 6-12 months ago if they do get a term sheet.

    Cheers
    Bronson
    Tweeting@BCL

  • Bronson

    Nate,
    Great post but I would add a caveat to what you are saying. Money is still going into and will continue to go into GOOD startups…. However, I think it would be easy for an entrepreneur to read your post, and think it isn’t going to be notably more difficult to raise money in the coming year(s?). It absolutely will. There are several reasons for this that all lead to less supply of money for startups.
    1) There are very few exits in this market. This means venture firms have to reserve more of there capital for follow on investment to get portfolio companies to break even. This means less of their capital going into new companies, especially at the early stages. (the most recent MoneyTree report documents that this is in fact happening)
    2) The majority of VC capital (not angel) comes from endowments and such. Endowments use portfolio theory to designate an optimum percentage of investment in ‘alternative assets’ (VC, PE, real estate…). When public markets decline, the percentage of their entire portfolio represented by alternative assets increases. They are forced to slow down or stop putting money into the over-weighted alternative assets until their portfolio is balanced again. This means less capital going into VC funds.

    Hence, there is less capital going in on the fund level over all and it has to take companies longer and farther. VCs shift their focus later to adjust, and spread out there existing capital over a longer time. Angels in turn must do the same to support their portfolio companies until they get venture funding. The pace of innovation isn’t slowing down (I don’t think) which means there is less capital to compete for good deals. Fewer deals will likely get done (with more reserve capital), supply and demand leads to lower valuations.

    I believe that in the free response you referred to the Angels were largely anticipating these lower valuations (akin to the last down turn). In short startups should anticipate getting lower valuations and more draconian terms than they may have 6-12 months ago if they do get a term sheet.

    Cheers
    Bronson
    Tweeting@BCL

  • Bronson

    The same argument could be made that now is a great time to invest in a value fund (I have several friends in the area and they are salivating). Endowments have a VERY long term horizon and I don't think they will decide to alter their allocation significantly. The roman numeral and top decile funds will still be able to raise capital but it will be more difficult across the board. I think on the east coast there is a general belief that SA is slower to react since they are somewhat more removed from the crisis. my 2cents

  • Bronson

    The same argument could be made that now is a great time to invest in a value fund (I have several friends in the area and they are salivating). Endowments have a VERY long term horizon and I don't think they will decide to alter their allocation significantly. The roman numeral and top decile funds will still be able to raise capital but it will be more difficult across the board. I think on the east coast there is a general belief that SA is slower to react since they are somewhat more removed from the crisis. my 2cents

  • http://enterventure.com Patrick

    I agree with greenskeptic — it's relative. There may be more risk from a capital perspective, but it also completely changes the risk / reward from a human capital perspective. Finance jobs no longer off the stability they once had.

    You might not have as easy access to capital, but if bodies are what you're looking for, Wall St would be a good place to start looking right now. Personally, I think that's a best case scenario. Build during the bust times, worry about money during the boom times.

    (Obviously that's a slight exaggeration but you get the point — few startups would claim they have too much money)

  • http://enterventure.com Patrick

    I agree with greenskeptic — it's relative. There may be more risk from a capital perspective, but it also completely changes the risk / reward from a human capital perspective. Finance jobs no longer off the stability they once had.

    You might not have as easy access to capital, but if bodies are what you're looking for, Wall St would be a good place to start looking right now. Personally, I think that's a best case scenario. Build during the bust times, worry about money during the boom times.

    (Obviously that's a slight exaggeration but you get the point — few startups would claim they have too much money)

  • http://www.alexrudloff.com Alex Rudloff

    It's not that start up activity will completely cease, it's just that cash flow may become very important. Advertising revenue dries up in a hurry during a recession. In a lot of ways, this could be the first real solid test of internet companies. (Though, I'll be the last person to try to predict the marketplace)

    We had the dot.com bust, which was largely our own doing and very much a correction. We had 9/11, which wasn't so much a nature business cycle as much as an event, and now we have (or could have) a full blown recession on the horizon.

    No exits, no cash flow, no returns.

    On the other hand, smart people pushed up against the wall do genius things. Someone will create something that will be the center of the next boom. Big, big reason to keep swinging through the 'storm'.

    Great post Nate, enjoy Ohio ;)

  • http://www.alexrudloff.com Alex Rudloff

    It's not that start up activity will completely cease, it's just that cash flow may become very important. Advertising revenue dries up in a hurry during a recession. In a lot of ways, this could be the first real solid test of internet companies. (Though, I'll be the last person to try to predict the marketplace)

    We had the dot.com bust, which was largely our own doing and very much a correction. We had 9/11, which wasn't so much a nature business cycle as much as an event, and now we have (or could have) a full blown recession on the horizon.

    No exits, no cash flow, no returns.

    On the other hand, smart people pushed up against the wall do genius things. Someone will create something that will be the center of the next boom. Big, big reason to keep swinging through the 'storm'.

    Great post Nate, enjoy Ohio ;)

  • http://enterventure.com Patrick

    I agree with greenskeptic — it's relative. There may be more risk from a capital perspective, but it also completely changes the risk / reward from a human capital perspective. Finance jobs no longer off the stability they once had.

    You might not have as easy access to capital, but if bodies are what you're looking for, Wall St would be a good place to start looking right now. Personally, I think that's a best case scenario. Build during the bust times, worry about money during the boom times.

    (Obviously that's a slight exaggeration but you get the point — few startups would claim they have too much money)

  • http://www.alexrudloff.com Alex Rudloff

    It's not that start up activity will completely cease, it's just that cash flow may become very important. Advertising revenue dries up in a hurry during a recession. In a lot of ways, this could be the first real solid test of internet companies. (Though, I'll be the last person to try to predict the marketplace)

    We had the dot.com bust, which was largely our own doing and very much a correction. We had 9/11, which wasn't so much a nature business cycle as much as an event, and now we have (or could have) a full blown recession on the horizon.

    No exits, no cash flow, no returns.

    On the other hand, smart people pushed up against the wall do genius things. Someone will create something that will be the center of the next boom. Big, big reason to keep swinging through the 'storm'.

    Great post Nate, enjoy Ohio ;)